from the nice-work,-EA dept

It never really made sense for EA to be so insistent on having draconian DRM on games. Before the company even launched Spore people made it quite clear the plan would backfire, but EA went forward with it anyway, creating a PR nightmare. And all for what? Turns out (not surprisingly) the DRM didn't do squat to stop unauthorized file sharing. Spore has now been declared the most downloaded video game of the year. And, even though the year's not over, no other game is going to catch up. And, it's worth noting, the game only launched in October, so this is only over a couple of months. In other words, EA's "antipiracy strategy" backfired almost completely. The company got a huge PR blackeye which probably only encouraged more people to download the game via file sharing. Can someone explain, again, why any company thinks DRM works?

from the this-isn't-hard dept

You would think that, given the widespread negative publicity generated by EA's choice to use draconian DRM with the release of Spore, that other video game companies might recognize that they'd be better served going in a different direction. Unfortunately, that's not the case with Sega, whose Sports Interactive subsidiary has released the latest copy of its incredibly popular Football Manager product, only to find that many, many legitimate customers are discovering they cannot activate the offering because the DRM is not working properly. And, not surprisingly, this is now leading to numerous negative reviews on Amazon, as people point out how the DRM has stymied their ability to actually play the game they've purchased (while some have noted that cracked copies of the game are already widely available). Congratulations, Sega. Not only have you failed to stop piracy, you've also pissed off many legitimate paying customers, and made sure that the game is poorly rated on Amazon. What do you plan for an encore?

from the don't-piss-off-your-customers dept

We had already pointed out one class action lawsuit filed against EA for its use of SecuROM DRM on the game Spore, but it appears that others are getting in on the act as well. GamePolitics has news of two more class action lawsuits filed against EA over its DRM choices. At some point, you have to wonder if this is just people piling on and hoping to win a cash settlement out of EA -- but again it does demonstrate how short-sighted the DRM decision was on the part of EA.

Considering that the game is available to download as an unauthorized file on various file sharing systems, it's pretty clear that the DRM did absolutely nothing to prevent any piracy on the game. However, it did significantly harm the company's reputation, and now they have to spend time and money fending off lawsuits. My guess is that the money spent on these lawsuits, combined with the revenue not recognized from folks who planned to buy the game but didn't because of all this, will actually greatly outweigh any real "losses" from piracy.

from the listening-to-your-customers dept

It would appear that gaming company EA got the wrong message concerning DRM after its Spore DRM debacle. While EA eventually backed down, it certainly did plenty to damage its own reputation in the gaming community. Hell, when we recently posted an article about EA that had nothing to do with DRM at all, a bunch of commenters used the post to complain about EA's DRM policy anyway. That suggests a Metallica-like reputation problem.

So, how is EA dealing with this reputation issue? Apparently by dismissing it as nothing to be concerned about. A whole bunch of our readers sent in this story about an EA exec claiming that only 0.2% of users would even notice the DRM used in Spore -- basically suggesting that the complaints were hyped up and out of proportion to the issue. That's sort of missing the point. While some users who complained might never actually encounter problems with the DRM, that doesn't mean that they're comfortable with the idea that EA has significantly limited how they can use a product that they purchased. Even a quick review of the history of DRM would show EA execs two things: it does nothing to stop piracy, and it seriously gets in the way of legitimate users, no matter how artfully designed.

from the increasing-parallels dept

With the news coming out that some purchasers of the video game Spore have filed a class action lawsuit against EA for its inclusion of SecuROM DRM, it's reaching the point where you have to wonder if this is becoming EA's "rootkit" moment. The parallels are there. Both involved an overly draconian form of DRM that severely limited how a "purchased" product could be used. Both involved hidden files installed on a computer -- and both resulted in massive backlash from consumers, and a very slow response from the company. And, of course, the rootkit resulted in class action lawsuits as well. At some point, perhaps, companies will start to realize that treating your customers as criminals is probably a bad idea.

from the taken-by-surprise? dept

It only took two weeks since the massive backlash against EA for the DRM and account limits it included with Spore for EA to recognize that maybe it needed to respond. This morning, EA agreed to up the install limit from 3 times to 5, claiming they may also make exceptions in some cases, and also released a patch allowing for multiple user names. While it's nice that the company finally responded, this is still a pretty weak response and doesn't address the core issues.

Also, it's odd that it took the company this long to respond. EA claims that the controversy caught them "off guard." If so, then they clearly haven't paid much attention. We were among many sites that talked about the DRM problem back in May, which got tons of angry comments. Other sites that discussed the DRM got similar angry comments as well, so the only way this should have caught EA off guard was if they weren't paying any attention whatsoever to what various gamers were saying.

from the they're-all-gone dept

Want to know how not to respond to criticism? By deleting it. Yet, it appears that's what Amazon has done. Earlier this week we wrote about the controversy of EA's decision to put cumbersome DRM on the highly anticipated video game, Spore. The response was that thousands of people started posting one star reviews of Spore, noting the problems with the DRM. Things then got worse when people realized that EA had misled customers about the fact that they could only have one user account on Spore.

Now, a bunch of people have noticed that Amazon appears to have deleted all of the reviews on the Spore page. This is only going to end badly. When you try to shut down a large group of people who feel wronged, you're not just whacking the bees' nest with a stick, you're setting it on fire with a flame thrower. The folks who were complaining are only going to complain louder, and louder. Remember what happened when Digg tried to takedown the AACS crack? Whoever was responsible for removing the comments -- whether it was Amazon or EA -- they may find that the reaction to trying to shut down the angry mob is only going to make folks that much angrier, and alert that many more people to the problems they have with EA's use of DRM.

Update: It appears that some, or potentially all, of the reviews are now back on the site, and Amazon is claiming that it was a "glitch" that they disappeared. Some people claim that their own reviews are not back yet, though, so the whole situation is a bit fluid. Either way, if it really was a glitch, it was a pretty bad time and place for such a glitch to occur.

from the and-it-lied-in-the-manual dept

Things aren't getting much better for EA since critics of its overly annoying DRM on the new video game Spore expressed their displeasure in droves on the Amazon page for the game. Now, Consumerist alerts us to another, related, issue that is pissing off many of those who did buy the game: you can only have one player account at a time. That means that if you live in a multi-person household, and multiple people would like to play the game themselves... EA says you need to pay up for another $50 license. Of course, if the game didn't have DRM that wouldn't be a problem.

Even worse, the manual for Spore says exactly the opposite:

You may have multiple Spore accounts for each installation of the game.

Users, however, have been complaining that doesn't seem possible, and while it took a while, an EA rep finally admitted "our bad":

That section in the manual was a misprint and will be corrected in future printings of the manual. There is one Spore registration/account per game/serial code so you are correct in that you cannot make multiple accounts at this time.

from the they-were-warned dept

Back in May, we wrote about an uproar in the gamer community over EA's decision to include some incredibly cumbersome DRM on some new games, including the highly anticipated Spore. That story got a ton of comments and plenty of other sites also wrote about it as well, leading EA to back down just a little bit, and promise to use slightly less draconian DRM. Either way, EA should have been well aware of how the community feels about DRM on games like Spore.

Apparently, the folks there didn't pay enough attention.

A bunch of readers have been sending in the news that Spore is getting slammed in reviews on its Amazon review page, as well over a thousand reviewers have all given the product one star, while trashing EA for the use of the DRM. Yet another lesson in what happens when your customers warn you ahead of time that they don't want you to cripple the products they buy from you -- and you fail to listen.

from the power-to-the-people dept

It amuses me sometimes when people get angry at a position we take, and say to us something along the lines of "well, if you're so upset about it, stop talking about it and do something," as if talking about it doesn't help to bring about change by getting many others interested as well. Thus, it's always nice to see when a story does help generate change. Last week, one of the stories we had that got the most traffic was about EA's use of controversial DRM on some hyped up new games. The DRM would require a regular internet connection and would regularly check in on users. The comments on that post were harsh, with many swearing never to buy those games -- and many wrote EA about those concerns as well. A bunch of other sites picked up on the uproar as well, and late Friday, EA agreed to cut back on the DRM plans. It's not a total capitulation, as there will still be some DRM used -- it just won't be quite as onerous as originally planned.